Financial Markets "Slammed" Post Election.If Slammed Day Before Romney Wins? Financiers Happy With Bernanke Printing Press/Their Candidate

Well Mr. Walayat,as below, got it exactly right as far as the election is concerned and the unemployment rate figures too. What I think he left out was a note about financial "powers that be" who brought the big post election day share market drop today, which if it had happened the day before the election would have changed the result dramatically. 

Stocks slammed 

All the reasons the financial analysts give for the huge drop in the markets were in place on November 5th and the markets could have dropped then but the financiers chose Obama, as they did in 2008 and we will have to live with the results which Palin describes, probably prophetically as as 'catastrophic".

I am not a conspiracy theorist, just a realist, as are the independent financial commentators like Mr Walayat and the others at The Market Oracle who have given insights into the "men behind the screen'. Thus I ask the question as to whether or not the 2008 crash-just before the election, had some degree of deliberate creation as to its timing so a Democrat who would allow Bernanke's printing press unlimited power would be elected.

Here is a previous post regarding the possibility of an engineered share market crash before the election. The reality turned out to be that the financial controllers are happy with the printing press. The crash may come now or in the near future instead.
************************************************************

With the addition of Sarah Palin to the ticket in 2008 the McCain campaign, which was lagging in the polls overtook candidate Obama. The left, and GOP turncoats, who after the 2008 election blamed Palin for McCain's loss, now advise that "the VP selection doesn't influence anyone's votes". 

Even if that is the case for Independents, there is no doubt whatsoever that Palin motivated the GOP voters, who had been lukewarm to McCain, to support the ticket.

If the massive stock market collapse had not happened the one can speculate, surely with a  fair degree of certainty, that the election would have been a lot closer, if not won by McCain/Palin. 

If there had been no crash, no McCain "campaign suspension" then it would seem unlikely that Indiana and North Carolina would have gone to Obama. Further, Florida and Ohio were lost to McCain by a slim margin-under the worst possible electoral conditions, and may well have gone to him otherwise.With those states, and only three other states Bush won in 2004, Virginia/Iowa/Colorado. McCain would have won.

Therefore President Obama owes his election, in no small part (or at least the large size of it) to the stock market crash of 2008. If, with the polls showing a fragile lead in the Electoral College for Obama now (and his being behind in the popular vote polls) after his disastrous debate performance, the share market crashed before the election then Romney stands every chance of a landslide victory.

Is such a crash possible?

Here is the latest snapshot of the share market from 
Reuters via Yahoo Finance

Wall Street posts worst week since June, banks weigh

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Stocks wrapped up their worst week in four months, led lower on Friday by financial shares as results from Wells Fargo and JPMorgan ignited concerns about shrinking profit margins for big lenders."If we keep getting negative reports, selling will pick up," The S&P 500 closed right above its 50-day moving average, barely enough to avoid going into the weekend with a technical red flag hanging over the market."

Here is the technical analysis from Anthony Cherniawski at the noted financial news accumulation site "Market Oracle" from England: 

Stock Market Crash Starts Here

"Well, folks, it appears that the market is going full circle.  Sunday is day 1,314 from the March 9, 2009 low.  Obviously the market cannot bottom on Sunday, but it appears that the crash scenario is getting more and more serious.  The Head & Shoulders neckline at 1430.75 and the Orthodox Broadening Top trendline await us just below current levels. According to Chris Carolan’s work, today and Monday are the designated panic days, while Tuesday and Wednesday may be the mop-up days for waves (4)-(5) and [4]-[5].  This is the way I see it at the present juncture.  All we need is to trigger the two sell signals and the trap door open"

This article comes after his previous days analysis which includes this quote 

Stock Market Pop and Drop

"This suggests that after a brief rally (which may already be over), the market resumes its downward spiral."

It would be ironic if a crash like 2008's happened just before the election, and Obama, who promised so much resulting from an economic calamity, went out by the same mechanism he came in by. In point of fact the economy, unemployment wise at least, is not better than when he came in with such promise and that, in itself, irrespective of whether a crash happens or not, may, or should, be enough to see him defeated.

************************************************************************

Here is my pre-election post on Mr.Walayat

The widely read ( at "The Market Oracle") and controversial economic commentator Nadeem Walayat headlines his predictions for the American presidential election in typically forthright fashion-with no equivocation or Etch-a Sketch flip flopping.

"Who Will Win the U.S. Presidential Election, Forecast 2012"

And here is his prediction-note too his prediction for the US unemployment rate at 7.9% which is exactly bang on.

"So whilst all eyes are on misleading highly erroneous opinion polls that give the illusion of a close race, and on which way Ohio goes, as things stand my forecast remains for President Obama to be re-elected on November 6th with the probability favouring more than 300 electoral votes i.e. there has been no net change since the release of September jobs report as the trend continues to build towards Obama increasing the real events based gap between himself and Mitt Romney by election day, enough to push through the 300 barrier, with or without Ohio and even a bad October Jobs report of a rate above 8% (I expect 7.9%), will not have enough time behind it to create enough momentum to make much impact at such a late stage."

The main reason why Walayat predicts President Obama will be re-elected with what is a landslide majority at +300 Electoral College votes is exactly the same reason as I predict -Romney's 47% speech and what killed his chances irrevocably, his poor debate performance subsequent to his major debate win in the Denver debate.

Here is Walayat again: 

"The bottom line is that Romney failed to re-ignite the momentum that built up following he first debate that was halted by the 6th October Unemployment report, instead his performance during subsequent debates has been weaker than Obama's and therefore the election really was lost by Mitt Romney during mid September following the 47% video, which crippled his chance of ever taking the lead as I correctly suggested at the time (19 Sep 2012 - The Day Mitt Romney Lost the U.S. Presidential Election 2012, Youtube Fund Raising Video)"

Palin Would Like A Female VP Running Mate 2016;Rice, Ayotte, Haley Or Martinez? A Tough Choice

Cross posted from Palin4President2016

SB - (Reading Twitter question) "will you run in 2016 if Romney doesn't win or in 2020 and would you consider Condi Rice as an all female ticket as your VP?

SP- "wouldn't that be cool an all female ticket.
Note that Palin didn't deny the possibility of either a presidential run or her having a female VP if a run took place. Using that as the baseline, i.e. a possible future run and female ticket mate who are currently the best placed candidates?

There is in fact a wealth of such possible top class people who each bring many qualities which would strikingly enhance a ticket.Here are some potential running mates for Palin and a discussion of their many outstanding qualities plus a few  of the negatives which might be associated with them in considering who would be the best choice for 2016.

Condoleezza Rice; Rice is unquestionably qualified in every respect  She is a world figure, would bring unquestioned foreign policy experience and huge gravitas. She is an accomplished speaker, businessperson, academic amongst a  host of qualities and qualifications. 

Her selection woudl immediately negate any leftist "racism" lies and her candidacy might slice some points off the massive Black vote for the Dem's which could be vital in marginal states. In a recent poll when voters were asked about Rice as a potential running mate the proposed Romney/Rice ticket received a substantial boost in support.

Rice might run into some opposition because of her abortion views and her association  with the fiscally negligent Bush administration  She would be harshly attacked by the left because of her role in the Iraq war and would be attacked over 9/11 being on her watch.

Nikki Haley: Haley would be very compatible with Palin as Haley owes her successful run, in large part, to Palin's endorsement at a crucial time in the South Carolina Republican governorship primary campaign. Hayley not only had to fight the opposing Dem's but also a slanderous GOP boys club innuendo attack on her. 

That she toughed both elements out on her way to being elected governor shows her strength of character and political toughness. Hayley would elicit sympathy from women who are fed up with the sort of attacks that women politicians receive and Palin/Haley might be a powerful magnet for the women's vote.She was a successful businessperson and is pro-life.
Her being from an ethnic minority might also broaden her appeal to other minorities as well.

Unfortunately mud sticks and Haley, as VP candidate, might find herself suffering the same fate that Palin did in that situation-the victim of endless media and leftist innuendo and slurs against her and her family. This might cause a distraction from the main emphasis of the campaign. South Carolina doesn't bring anything to the Electoral College table as it is a safe Republican state.
Haley would appear to be lacking in foreign policy experience.

Kelly Ayotte: Ayotte is another senator (like Deb Fischer shortly) who owes her election, in part, to Palin's endorsement. Ayotte is clearly seen as a future star for the GOP as she was given a speaking role at the Tampa convention. She had a successful legal and administrative career prior to her election as governor of New Hampshire. New Hampshire is a battleground state and with her on the ticket it might be an important part of  an Electoral College victory

Her relatively unknown national profile and short time in office might be seen as a negative. New Hampshire, although a swing state has only four Electoral College votes and a running mate from a larger state might be looked for.She too would be perceived as lacking in foreign policy experience.

Susana Martinez; Martinez is yet another governor who was endorsed by Palin in the 2010 campaign. She has substantial conservative support, is a young, vibrant person and had a successful legal career.She is pro-life.

Martinez obviously could be crucial in attracting the fast growing Hispanic vote to a GOP ticket which could bring huge Electoral College rewards from Florida and other states with a growing Hispanic population.New Mexico has eluded the GOP for two elections in a row and Martinez bringing it into the GOP's column along with Colorado and Nevada could be a massive assistance to the ticket.

She is relatively unknown and doesn't have recognized international experience.

Some might wish Michele Bachmann's name to be added to the list. Bachmann's qualities and negatives are well known and she doesn't seem a "fit" for Palin.

**********************************************************************

Here is the original interview and discussion regarding a  possible future run and female VP running mate

SB - (Reading Twitter question) "will you run in 2016 if Romney doesn't win or in 2020 and would you consider Condi Rice as an all female ticket as your VP?

SP- "wouldn't that be cool an all female ticket....maybe that's part of the answer America needs. Um, I am obviously still thinking about running in the future for an office that would allow the effective policies that America needs. We (I) have a good track record having served in the past at local, state level of government, really engaging in the relentless reform, that is needed (indistinct - clean??) and reign in the growth of government. I think I could put some of that experience to good use on a national level so obviously still thinking about it but, um, we'll see what the future holds.

The Left Exultant:Daily Kos "Time To Trample The Republican Party Into the Dirt"

Disregarding president Obama's post election unity desire the "progressive" left,as exemplified by the "Daily Kos" site sees instead their historic opportunity to throw their fellow Americans into the dirt, grinding their faces in it and then throwing them and off a cliff .

 All Republicans are either money hungry plutocrats or "far right nut jobs".None apparently have a deep patriotic love for America based on traditional values.

In a post which leaves absolutely no room for doubt about what the left thinks about anyone who doesn't share their, to them transcendent views the author lays it on the line 
AT THIS LINK here are some highlights:

"Actually, the Republican party embodies everything that is not just wrong, but actually pathogenic, about the American political system and American policy.  

The underlying ideology in the case of the republican party is now randism, more broadly known as social darwinism (which btw wormed its way into the core of the Nazi ideology).  It is so repugnant to the human soul that it does not dare speak its name, and the more it is revealed to the American public, the more it is reviled by any non-sociopath.

and this comment: 

"Your safety is mine too! Let's join hands and 

march forward, stomping onto their carcass". and, succinctly put 

" I want them destroyed utterly."

               Time to Trample the Republican Party        into the Dirt

Fair use notice: This website contains copyrighted material, the use of which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Excerpts of such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this website is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Original material published on this website may be excerpted and the excerpt reproduced for the purpose of critical reviews. However, such original material may not be reproduced in full on another website or in any manner without prior approval from this website’s owner. In all cases when material from this website is reproduced in full or in part, the author and website must be credited by name and a hyperlink provided to this website.

The Top Ten Reasons Why Romney/Ryan Lost The Election

Romney lost because he carried too much baggage which defined him negatively, and which only President Obama's mistaken softly softly first debate touch overcame for a very brief time. Romney's baggage included;

1.His reputation for changing his opinions/beliefs to suit whatever the immediate contingency seemed to require

2.Women did not like/trust him. "women's issues" had little to do with that, as women were accepting of G.W. Bush as a candidate even though he held firm conservative opinions on abortion.

3.Mormonism is not in the American mainstream and would have influenced some Christians against voting for Romney.

4.The view of Romney as a member of the out of touch corporate elite, was reinforced beyond repair by the leaked "47%" video. The fact that his campaign downplayed it, then admitted it was a mistake, only assisted in reinforcing the "etch a sketch" view of Romney.,

5.Choosing Paul Ryan (has there ever been a more low key VP "spearhead" in recent history?) as his running mate put Florida in danger without delivering Wisconsin, or any other marginal state. Rubio might have brought substantial Hispanic support and Florida, McDonnell might have won Virginia, and most importantly Portman might have brought Ohio, the loss of which is an insurmountable barrier.

6.Romney did not follow up his Denver debate win with an all out hard hitting effort. This reason, following on from the disastrous "47%" speech is also the main reason why noted analysts Nadeem Walayat predicted an Obama re-election 

AT THIS LINK

There seemed to be a quiet hiatus between that debate, and the second debate, which allowed Obama to recover his ground. Ryan brought nothing in his debate with Biden, and the significant analyst Dr.Wang at Princeton traces Obama's poll recovery as commencing from the Biden/Ryan debate.


7.Romney choosing Governor Christie as his spearhead at Tampa whilst rejecting the loyal Palin, which cost him votes from her supporters, was a disaster, as Christie became an effusive supporter of the "presidential" Obama through the Hurricane Sandy aftermath.

8.Romney's refusing to release his tax records, then releasing some after a huge amount of media and opposition attacks, was a major distraction from his campaign which should have used that time to focus on a positive economic plan.

9.The charge that Romney would have let GM go bankrupt made blue collar car industry Michigan, and rust belt Ohio nearly impossible to win.The Jeep controversy was another nail in the Ohio coffin.

10.But, perhaps more than all these ten reasons put together, the number one reason why Romney lost is the same reason Gore and Kerry lost-people just don't like him



For President Obama to have over Mitt Romney, in this economy, something beyond the accepted psephologist's reasoning must be at play.


President Clinton's stricture in his first campaign was "it's the economy stupid" but it may be that, at the end of the day a factor divorced from the economy, divorced from perceptions of leadership and even divorced from personal partisan opinion is at play in determining the winner of presidential elections.

If there ever was an election where the economy, and especially millions being unemployed/underemployed, should be the determining factor then it was this one. And yet, the president who himself advised "I will be in trouble if I don't bring down the unemployment rate" won re-election.

It appears that the "likability factor' is the final determining factor in the voting booth if history is a guide.

This would explain why George W. Bush "the man you would like to have a beer with" who was derided for being a goofball in some quarters, defeated the, frankly unlovely Al Gore, and the even more unlovely John Kerry. By all economic factors Gore, an eight year serving and respected vice-president, should have won in a landslide at a time of substantial economic prosperity, yet he couldn't even carry his home state of Tennessee. Kerry lost by over two million votes to a person he easily defeated in the debates.

The likability factor appears, if it is the only parameter to judge elections by, in case after case. G.H.W. Bush although patrician, appeared both competent and likable when compared to the "tank commander" Dukakis whose likability went out the window when he couldn't defend his wife in an hypothetical murder attempt on her. Bush's patrician bearing was the antithesis of likability when up against Bill Clinton and as for Bob Dole-no contest.

Reagan/Mondale not even worth considering. Reagan Carter, when Carter was at his weakest, again no contest. When Carter was the coming man, "Mr. Nice Guy", and Ford was amiable, but bumbling, Carter had the edge. Nixon had common man appeal, whereas McGovern was seen as an oddball-ditto LBJ/Goldwater. Eisenhower/Stevenson-no contest of course in the likability stakes. 

The mass appeal of Nixon and JFK was reflected in the minuscule popular vote difference between them. Truman of course overcame all the odds, but perhaps it was the "Hiya Harry" factor against a man described as the little man on the wedding cake Dewey, which carried the day

Clearly likability is not the only factor and there are instances, massive economic collapse and fear, and of course war, which trumps it e.g. Roosevelt or Obama  in a time of economic fear with both having the likability factor edge on their opponents. Again, given the current economic situation Romney should have won, but he didn't and Obama was certainly, it is fair to say, perceived as "the man you would have a beer with" compared to the patrician Romney.

That brings me to consideration of the 2016 election. If, as I believe, Hillary Clinton runs she would, barring an economic collapse, be expected to win given her undoubted abilities. However, in my view, and if the media filter allows even a modicum of fair and balanced reporting, Sarah Palin's common touch humanity would, given the likability factor as key, win the day if history is a guide.

N.B. Some Republican pundits are blaming Hurricane Sandy as tipping the balance-not so according to the polling analysis which showed a clear move to President Obama starting from the Biden/Ryan debate and continuing unabated until election day.

20 Top Pundits Who Predicted Romney Win Including:Barnes/Will/Martin/Rove/Morris (Landslide)/Hewitt/Barone/Cost

Here are some of the 20 major pundits who prognosticated, some with in-depth reasoning and charts, that Mitt Romney would be elected president. This is detailed purely as reflection on the value of partisan crystal ball gazing and whether media commentators should be taken seriously-even if from ones own political party.

By the way-this person made a challenge to put up or shut up before the election. Since I did, last week, at THIS LINK
I can mock, or rather make a point, with impunity.



***********************************************************************
With thanks to the Votemaster

What do conservatives think? The Denver Post has collected map sfrom eight conservative map makers. Here are the electoral vote scores they are predicting.

Pundit	Obama	Romney
Dick Morris	213	325
George Will	217	321
Michael Barone	223	315
Dean Chambers	227	311
Andrew Beyer	254	284
Karl Rove	259	279
Ben Domenech	260	278
Leslie Sanchez	263	275

*****************************************************************************

http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/01c7686e-00ff-4a27-ac09-f6f83a4c4bd7

Here's Hugh Hewitt's money quotes:

"You can feel, and see, the energy draining from the Obama campaign even as it swells on the the Romney/Ryan siide(sic) "

"As I discussed with Rubin last night, the Obama campaign resembles nothing so much as John McCain's did at this point in 2008 --aware of its pending defeat, but struggling on and hoping for some enormous "game changer" to arrive. The discipline and professionalism of Team Romney minimizes that possibility, and the experience of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will prevent unforced errors."
************************************************************************
Larry Kudlow at Real Clear Politics on election day is optimistic for Romney:


"Romney's Optimism Will Win"
Money quote: "I believe Mitt Romney is the optimist, and Barack Obama is the pessimist. It’s Romney’s election to win"


*********************************************************************************

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/why-romney-will-win_660391.html

Fred Barnes at The Weekly Standard had no doubts:

"Why Romney Will Win" and after reviewing the campaign he makes this categoric statement;

"Conclusion: Romney will be elected the 45^th president of the United States."


***********************************************************************

Charlie Martin, writing at PJ Media Tatler, today predicted that Governor Romney would win sufficient popular votes for a 341 to 197 electoral vote victory over President Obama. Note the limited extent to which his projection refers to polling results.

"All, or nearly all, states in which the poll on Romney/Obama is even within the margin of error will go for Romney.  My reasoning is  this:

• All these samples seem to me to still imply a greater D turnout than R. Nearly all actual reported early voting has been heavily Republican, plus we have the Washington Post polling on defectors.  So it seems very probable that the actual turnout will be favoring Republicans, possibly heavily.
• The “Sandy” debacle isn’t making Obama’s administration look good.  This may not mean more votes for Romney (although it could), but it may well depress Democrat voters on Tuesday.
• Romney/Ryan are drawing tens of thousands, Obama/Biden thousands or hundreds.  Again, this indicates greater enthusiasm and suggests greater Republican turnout"

********************************************************************************

George Will predicted

Electoral College
Romney: 321
Obama: 217

Popular Vote
Romney 49.7
Obama: 48.4

*****************************************************************************

R.Emmett Tyrrell Jr. at The American Spectator  AT THIS LINK
"Au Revoir, Mr. President"


Best quote: "Next week President Obama goes into retirement. I hope he will consider Hawaii"

*******************************************************************************
Not quite a presidential prediction but an interesting one 

Tom Ridge: Romney Will Win Pennsylvania

********************************************************************************************

"Dick Morris: Romney Will Win In A "Landslide"

The wonderful Dick Morris in full flight

DICK MORRIS: In Florida, the [New York] Times says Obama is going to win by 1. But their sample has 7 points more Democrats than Republicans.

Pollster John McLaughlin and I went through the actual results of the last four elections and on average, the Republicans had 1% more than the Democrats. So that poll is off by a factor of 8. So instead of Obama winning by 1, Romney would win Florida by 7.

In Ohio, Obama is shown winning by 5 in the Times poll. But they had 8 points more Democrats than Republicans and historically, there are only two points more Ds than Rs. So that's 6 points off. So instead of Romney losing by 5, he wins Ohio by 1.

And in Virginia, they have Obama winning by 2. But they have 8 points more Democrats than Republicans and historically there's one points more Republican than Democrat. That's off by a factor of 9, Romney wins Virginia by 7.

*************************************************************************************

Not a 100% election winning prediction but halfway there from Joann Weiner at the Washington Post

AT THIS LINK

"Why Romney will win the popular vote"

Best equivocation comment: 

"If the economy’s all that matters, then Romney’s set to win the popular vote. But, that’s not all that matters. For Gov. Romney to become President Romney he must reach 270 electoral votes. And, that’s no sure thing."

*****************************************************************************************

Mary Cate Cary at US News & World report has no such wishy washy prediction qualms

AT THIS LINK

"Why Mitt Romney Will Win"

Best quote: "If you want to know who is winning an election, look at who is winning independents. Obama has lost them.

Romney has won the mainstream. "

**************************************************

Here the very positive Rich Galen at Town Hall AT THIS LINK

"Romney Will Win"

Best quote: "The Romney campaign has prepared for the end game and over the next five days will show that their ground game strategy and tactics were better than the Obama campaign's.

The tide of history is running against Barack Obama and, as the English King Canute said in about 1016 when he proved even with all his power he could not hold back the tide:"

************************************************************************************************************

Michael Hudome at The daily Caller AT THIS LINK very confidently predicts an early night for everyone:

"Romney will win Pennsylvania"

Really good quote: 

"Despite all the hype, it’s going to be a short election night. The Keystone State is the key reason. Pennsylvania will go for Governor Mitt Romney.

************************************************

Michael Barone Senior political analyst (sic) does it wishy washy style but nevertheless goes for a Romney win at The Washington Examiner AT THIS LINK

"Barone: Going out on a limb: Romney beats Obama, handily"

Best prediction:-Romney will win all these states

North Carolina (15 electoral votes). Obama has abandoned this target. Romney.

Florida (29). The biggest target state has trended Romney since the Denver debate. I don't see any segment of the electorate favoring Obama more than in 2008, and I see some (South Florida Jews) favoring him less. Romney.

Ohio (18). The anti-Romney auto bailout ads have Obama running well enough among blue-collar voters for him to lead most polls. But many polls anticipate a more Democratic electorate than in 2008. Early voting tells another story, and so does the registration decline in Cleveland's Cuyahoga County. In 2004, intensity among rural, small -town and evangelical voters, undetected by political reporters who don't mix in such circles, produced a narrow Bush victory. I see that happening again. Romney.

Virginia (13). Post-debate polling mildly favors Romney, and early voting is way down in heavily Democratic Arlington, Alexandria, Richmond and Norfolk. Northern Virginia Asians may trend Romney. Romney.

Colorado (9). Unlike 2008, registered Republicans outnumber registered Democrats, and more Republicans than Democrats have voted early. The Republican trend in 2010 was squandered by weak candidates for governor and senator. Not this time. Romney.

Iowa (6)

******************************************************************************************************

Here's Jay Cost at The Weekly Standard AT THIS LINK with this straightforward post title with the get out of jail word "likely" but ends with a more adventurous

 "I am more interested in connecting the polls to history and the long-run structure of American politics, and when I do that I see a Romney victory. "

Morning Jay: Why Romney Is Likely to Win

Followed by this quote:

 "I think Mitt Romney is likely to win next Tuesday.
For two reasons:

 (1) Romney leads among voters on trust to get the economy going again.

 (2) Romney leads among independents."

****************************************************************
Here's the emphatic Dan McLaughlin at REDSTATE 
 AT THIS LINK

"Why I Think Obama Is Toast"

and the money quote, Including actual toast

"Conclusion
The waterfront of analyzing all the factors that go into my conclusion here is too large to cover in one post, but the signs of Obama’s defeat are too clear now to ignore"

******************************************************************************

It is almost unfair of course to include Karl Rove in this compendium as, of course, what was he expected to say. However for the record here is the whiteboard kings prediction.From THIS LINK

By KARL ROVE

It comes down to numbers. And in the final days of this presidential race, from polling data to early voting, they favor Mitt Romney.

Fair use notice: This website contains copyrighted material, the use of which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Excerpts of such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this website is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Original material published on this website may be excerpted and the excerpt reproduced for the purpose of critical reviews. However, such original material may not be reproduced in full on another website or in any manner without prior approval from this website’s owner. In all cases when material from this website is reproduced in full or in part, the author and website must be credited by name and a hyperlink provided to this website.